PvXwiki talk:Flavor of the Month
Is the breakdown into professions too much? I think so, but I don't know. -- [[User:frvwfr2|'frvwfr2']] (talk)( ) 22:39, 15 May 2007 (CEST) The only way to really do this is make it a weekly article bit. Each article gets a particular category. RA/TA gets one, AB gets another, HA, and finally GVG. They do something similiar in "State of the Game" the weekly article on Guild wars.com. If you are just wanting to do a "Flavor of the Month" builds, and document them... shesh... Have you ever looked in build stubs? Thats the current state of the meta game right there. But, a weekly article following trends specific to each arena is a good idea. I mean, seriously, there has to be some kind of reason that on tuesdays around 10 a.m. there are 2-3 monks in every RA team... C'Mon! Shireen 22:30, 16 May 2007 (CEST) :I agree. We won't be able to fit everything in one page. Taking inspiration from "State of the Game" would be a very good idea. --MasterPatricko 13:14, 17 May 2007 (CEST) ::I'm gonna write up one real quick here, see if you guys like the format (Edit: Nevermind, I really don't feel like doing that... Just discuss the format here I guess. I am bad at writing.) I'm at school, and soooo bored. -- [[User:frvwfr2|'frvwfr2']] (talk)( ) 13:47, 17 May 2007 (CEST) :::So is this thing ever gonna happen? ~~ [[User:frvwfr2|'frvwfr2']] (talk··· ) 14:39, 22 May 2007 (CEST) Probably not. [[GW:User:Readem|'Readem']] (''talk''* ) 14:48, 22 May 2007 (CEST) :Well I want it to happen, I just need a group of people who would be willing to maintain it. Then we can start on this. ^^ '~\^/~' [[User:Napalm Flame|'Napalm Flame']] (talk) 14:51, 22 May 2007 (CEST) ::If I had time to do this, that would mean I have absolutely no life. Better get started. [[GW:User:Readem|'Readem']] (''talk''* ) 14:53, 22 May 2007 (CEST) Auron's take The vast majority of the current page is unneeded. FotM builds are basically the gimmick of the day; they aren't hard to play, they are easy to find, but there aren't many of them. Burst sins are gimmicks and definitely a past FotM, but RC prot monks are every bit if not more common, and nobody looks at monk bars as fotm or not. So... break it down by profession? Nah, just list the profession if it has a fotm build. RA/TA/AB builds all have the same meta, their players all bitch about the same stuff, but most of the time, nothing new comes out of these (because none of these generate builds worth mentioning, it all comes from gvg guilds). Listing the meta for this would be easy ("burst sins, touch rangers, whammos with mending and sever/gash"). The meta for HA would be obvious, it could have 5 or 6 slots (generally the r3 groups vary builds; when they get tired of one, they find another gimmick to run). In this, we could be very successful, if we had people interested in keeping it updated. The GvG meta would be harder to define; lots of people disagree on what makes a gimmick for GvG. We'd have to define that before starting to list any meta builds. Honestly, the HA part will be updated weekly, the GvG part maybe monthly, and the RA/TA/AB stuff will be updated when eotn comes out with new gimmicks (nothing new will pop up, unless some iQ-esque guild comes up with it and it catches on). -Auron 15:24, 22 May 2007 (CEST) :I'll help do GvG if this ever gets serious. I am an obs hound for my guild anyway. [[GW:User:Readem|'Readem']] (''talk''* ) 15:35, 22 May 2007 (CEST) Well I'll try to clear this up a LOT more if you define what sections we should have Auron, and I'll get straight to work scouting the arenas for trends. '~\^/~' [[User:Napalm Flame|'Napalm Flame']] (talk) 18:27, 22 May 2007 (CEST)